Gingrich: "I am for people, individuals -- exactly like automobile insurance -- individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance."

Romney: “right now in this country, people that don’t have health insurance go to the hospital if they get a serious illness, and they get treated for free by government. My plan says no, they can’t do that. No more free riders. People have to take personal responsibility. I consider it a conservative plan.”

DeMint on Romneycare: "Well, that's something that I think we should do for the whole country. And the governor just looked at the numbers like a good businessman and realized that we could give people private insurance policies cheaper than we could provide free health care. And what that does is spread out the risk; it gets the government out of the health care business and actually makes the health care system work a lot better."

Grassley (longer so putting it in a quote box):

Quote:

And you're probably picking up 1,000 — some estimates — $1,800 on your premiums for people that don't have health insurance because of the expensive use of emergency rooms, as an example.

There isn't anything wrong with it, except some people look at it as an infringement upon individual freedom. But when it comes to states requiring it for automobile insurance, the principle then ought to lie the same way for health insurance, because everybody has some health insurance costs, and if you aren't insured, there's no free lunch. Somebody else is paying for it.

So I think individual mandates are more apt to be accepted by a vast majority of people in Congress than an employer mandate would be, as an example.

And with that goes the portability of the insurance from one employer to another so you don't — you don't have to be tied to your job.

But there is a very important issue here, and that is that we consider that there are some people who can afford their own health insurance but decide not to buy it because they want to pay it out of pocket. Should you require those people to do it?

I believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates."

Stop fucking pretending this wasn't your idea all along, Republicans. You only hate it now because you are the party of no. You only hate individual mandates now because it was part of Obama's plan. Maybe Obama should come out and say that he loves living in America and never plans to leave the country--maybe then some of you would get the fuck out and stop standing in the way of progress.

And they have the nerve to call others hypocrites...that's some fucking chutzpah right there.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

Gingrich: "I am for people, individuals -- exactly like automobile insurance -- individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance."

Romney: “right now in this country, people that don’t have health insurance go to the hospital if they get a serious illness, and they get treated for free by government. My plan says no, they can’t do that. No more free riders. People have to take personal responsibility. I consider it a conservative plan.”

DeMint on Romneycare: "Well, that's something that I think we should do for the whole country. And the governor just looked at the numbers like a good businessman and realized that we could give people private insurance policies cheaper than we could provide free health care. And what that does is spread out the risk; it gets the government out of the health care business and actually makes the health care system work a lot better."

Grassley (longer so putting it in a quote box):

Stop fucking pretending this wasn't your idea all along, Republicans. You only hate it now because you are the party of no. You only hate individual mandates now because it was part of Obama's plan. Maybe Obama should come out and say that he loves living in America and never plans to leave the country--maybe then some of you would get the fuck out and stop standing in the way of progress.

And they have the nerve to call others hypocrites...that's some fucking chutzpah right there.

Well I hate the individual mandate. Only because a single payer public option does not require a profit for the fucking insurance companies, as obamacare does. We need to get the insurance companies the fuck out of government policy.

But I completely agree with the premise of this thread. Obamacare is Republican policy and the only reason they oppose it now is to attack Obama. A liberal democratic policy would have been the public option and there certainly wouldn't have been an individual mandate.

If ObamaCare were just one thing you'd have a point that some conservatives had the idea before it was rolled into this law. But ObamaCare is a disastrous mishmash of taxeds government regulation, fake accounting, blatant power grabs, expansion of the welfare roles ... where to end?

The idea of an individual mandate is one of the major points that has riled up the Republicans currently in office and currently running for president. That's complete hypocrisy and you know it. Admit it.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

The notion that Republicans actually invented Obamacare is severely flawed. It is true that some Republicans (like Gingrich) favored a nationwide federal mandate (though Romney has never supported this, no matter how hard you try to claim otherwise).

However, the bill itself bears little resemblance to Republican proposals from the early 1990s. I don't recall Republicans ever proposing a $2 trillion, 2,000 page government takeover of healthcare. Also, you should recall that many Republicans supported a mandate-type system in response to Hillarcare, which was essentially a full-blown universal healthcare system.

As for me, I'm frankly not sure what I think of mandates at the state level. I see some advantages to be sure. The problem Romney has, politically speaking, is that people refuse to understand (or can't understand) that while the states have the power to enact such programs, the federal government does not. And speaking of Romneycare, the argument that it is the same as Obamacare is also bogus. There are similarities, but there are also huge differences. Romneycare was not a takeover of healthcare. It was an attempt to get more people insured and prevent people freeloading on the system, so to speak. By all accounts, it's been successful in many ways.

On the other hand, Obamacare is the aforementioned bloated, 2,000 page, $2 trillion over 10 years takeover of healthcare that WILL end private medical insurance. This will occur because of the mandate that insurance companies cover all pre-existing conditions. Someone could (and will), pay the relatively small fine until, say, he gets brain cancer. Then he'll get to buy medical insurance only when he needs it. Most people understand that this violates the entire concept of what "insurance" is. Insurance companies will not be able to stay in business under this model, leaving the federal government to pick up the pieces. My prediction is all private medical insurance will be gone if this stands...within 10 or possibly, even 5 years. This, of course, was Obama's plan to begin with.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

The problem Romney has, politically speaking, is that people refuse to understand (or can't understand) that while the states have the power to enact such programs, the federal government does not.

It's almost like they should teach the constitution in school or something...and perhaps make elected officials read it and understand it before they take the oath to defend it. It might help if the media did also...but then, they're journalists, what can we expect from them.

It's almost like they should teach the constitution in school or something...and perhaps make elected officials read it and understand it before they take the oath to defend it. It might help if the media did also...but then, they're journalists, what can we expect from them.

Exactly. By the way, it's worse...because many voters don't get it or just don't care. This happens on both sides of the aisle, too. You've got people like Santorum out there claiming Romney wants a federal mandate and that there is no difference between the fed and state levels. Then you've got people like Nancy Pelosi, who said "are you serious?" when asked about the law's Constitutional foundations.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Perhaps even more disturbing than Obamacare or its origins is the fact that everyone's life, liberty, and property have been placed in the hands of 5 government lawyers with lifetime tenure. In some cases if there is a 4-4 spit, one government lawyer wields this ultimate power.

Having just read Common Sense by Thomas Paine once again, it is apparent that the colonies wanted to declare independence from such a government. Instead, what we have is essentially an oligarchy.

Perhaps even more disturbing than Obamacare or its origins is the fact that everyone's life, liberty, and property have been placed in the hands of 5 government lawyers with lifetime tenure. In some cases if there is a 4-4 spit, one government lawyer wields this ultimate power.

Having just read Common Sense by Thomas Paine once again, it is apparent that the colonies wanted to declare independence from such a government. Instead, what we have is essentially an oligarchy.

Exactly. And what's worse is that some of those government lawyers believe that the Constitution must change (without actually changing) over time as a "living, breathing document."

You know what's even worse than that? Some of them have openly stated their disdain for the document and they wouldn't use it as a model for another country if being written today.

You know what's even WORSE than that? Some have openly relied on foreign law in deciding cases, not the Constitution with which they are charged with interpreting.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Obamacare does not equal Romneycare. It simply does not, no matter how much you want it to.

Semantics, semantics. The last thing I *wanted*, as you said, is for ObamaCare to "equal" RomneyCare!!!

ObamaCare, although not a verbatim copy of RomneyCare, is according to all accounts, a damned near approximation, no matter how much the Heritage Foundation tried to weasel out and cover its tracks.

The principal "socialist" aspect of ObamaCare is the corporate welfare for the parasitic elements within the health 'care' industry... the useless middlemen who get between doctor and patient and inflate the costs.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow

Semantics, semantics. The last thing I *wanted*, as you said, is for ObamaCare to "equal" RomneyCare!!!

ObamaCare, although not a verbatim copy of RomneyCare, is according to all accounts, a damned near approximation, no matter how much the Heritage Foundation tried to weasel out and cover its tracks.

The principal "socialist" aspect of ObamaCare is the corporate welfare for the parasitic elements within the health 'care' industry... the useless middlemen who get between doctor and patient and inflate the costs.

No, it's not. It's a much larger takeover of the healthcare industry. It will end private insurance and cost trillions. Romneycare doesn't do that. It's also a state program, which Constitutionally speaking is completely different.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Obfuscation and misdirection, SDW. Republicans were for the individual mandate until it became part of Obama's plan. Now the idea of an individual mandate is being heard by the Supreme Court with Republicans attacking the notion.

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” -Sagan

Obfuscation and misdirection, SDW. Republicans were for the individual mandate until it became part of Obama's plan. Now the idea of an individual mandate is being heard by the Supreme Court with Republicans attacking the notion.

I don't deny any of that (except for the obfuscation/misdirection part). However, that doesn't mean Obamacare was invented by Republicans. It's not just the mandate that's the problem.

I never supported a federal mandate, by the way.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.